When did an Afghan national identity form?

When did an Iranian national identity form? When did a Belgian national identity form? When did a Chinese national identity form?

There's nothing particularly unique about an Afghan identity: it happens to all modern states that exert control over a territory for a significant period of time (about 300 years in this case I think).

I'll go over Afghanistan: A Cultural and Political History by Thomas Barfield tomorrow morning and give you a proper answer.

I have heard it said that it originated in the resistance to the British in the First and Second Anglo-Afghan wars. This would make a degree of sense, an external foe driving them to feel a sense of unity

When did an Afghan national identity form?

It didn't.

It was a mediaeval multi-ethnic kingdom held together for a while, but once modern influences took hold it fell apart into tribal and ethnic chaos. It is currently held together by a thread, which is Western intervention. When that disappears it will fall apart quickly.

Hibernian said:

When did an Afghan national identity form?

It didn't.

It was a mediaeval multi-ethnic kingdom held together for a while, but once modern influences took hold it fell apart into tribal and ethnic chaos. It is currently held together by a thread, which is Western intervention. When that disappears it will fall apart quickly.

Click to expand...

Do you know any Afghans?

Eusebio said:

Do you know any Afghans?

Click to expand...

I knew a Pashtun girl in collage (her family were refugees in Ireland), but no, I don't know any now. That has little to do with anything though, because even if Afghan expats have an Afghan national consciousness, that doesn't mean that the majority of people in Afghanistan do (they live in different worlds). Afghans who live in the West are likely to be middle-class intelligentsia who had to flee the chaos of the country, they're not necessarily representative of the general Afghan population. Who are (as far as I can tell) totally tribal in their identity.

Tufto said:

It's debatable whether a Belgian one ever formed, and China had a very long history of a united polity and common culture. Afghanistan doesn't seem to be like either.

Would appreciate it, thanks.

Click to expand...

Actually if we're talking about a Chinese 'national' identity that probably only came about in the late 19th Century when Han republican revolutionaries (e.g. Sun Yat-Sen) sought to find something to encourage resistance against the Manchus. Before that it was pretty much a 'civilized people/barbarian' distinction.

I would expect an 'Afghan' national identity to have its roots in the Hotaki/Durrani Empires, but for the broad mass of the population to identify as Afghan, that would probably require mass education of the sort that was established in the mid-20th Century under both monarchical/Soviet/post-Taliban regimes.

Tufto said:

A source would be useful .

Click to expand...

No source, just my opinion.

Except for the Hazars and some odd groups here and there, the majority of the Afghan ethnic groups are split between countries. There's no real point in defining yourself as part of an entity that doesn't rule you or even concern you.

When talking about afghanistan as Hibernian points out it's good to remember that it's a country on welfare and to be true it has been ever since the middle of the 19th century and whenever that support is withdrawn the country falls apart quickly. Personally I don't think that it's an effect of ethnic hetereogenity but rather really useless governance where resources are pretty much pooled in Kabul. However if the support is removed it's likely that the afghans will return to putting their ethnicity first, not because they've had a change in identity but the common unwillingness of being part of something "bad".

Hibernian said:

No source, just my opinion.

Click to expand...

HuzzButt said:

Except for the Hazars and some odd groups here and there, the majority of the Afghan ethnic groups are split between countries. There's no real point in defining yourself as part of an entity that doesn't rule you or even concern you.

When talking about afghanistan as Hibernian points out it's good to remember that it's a country on welfare and to be true it has been ever since the middle of the 19th century and whenever that support is withdrawn the country falls apart quickly. Personally I don't think that it's an effect of ethnic hetereogenity but rather really useless governance where resources are pretty much pooled in Kabul. However if the support is removed it's likely that the afghans will return to putting their ethnicity first, not because they've had a change in identity but the common unwillingness of being part of something "bad".

Click to expand...

Fact 1: Afghans say they have a strong national identity.
Fact 2: Afghans have had 30+ years of civil war.

Your theory on how to reconcile these two facts: Afghans are all blind, or liars, because in your opinion a country with a strong national identity should not have any infighting.

Have I summed that up correctly?

Here's my alternate theory: Having a strong national identity does not mean your country can't be deeply divided. Especially not when it's in the middle east, and two superpowers spend 15+ years arming everyone with hypermodern weapons and destroying every institution your country ever had.

JodelDiplom said:

Fact 1: Afghans say they have a strong national identity.

Click to expand...

That's a double statement:
1. intensity
2. <identification>

(And of course the answer depends on the framing of the question and the setting of that question.)

JodelDiplom said:

Fact 2: Afghans have had 30+ years of civil war.

Click to expand...

Fun Fact, not all of them. Even funnier fact: Ethnic lines are a somewhat good divisor of who had civil war and who didn't.

JodelDiplom said:

Your theory on how to reconcile these two facts: Afghans are all blind, or liars, because in your opinion a country with a strong national identity should not have any infighting.

Click to expand...

The mentioned theory is your theory on my theory, a theory I've never claimed, further more your assesment that led to you calling paradox is based on your wiew of afghanistan, not a common ground. So while i might scold I'd rather not.

JodelDiplom said:

Have I summed that up correctly?

Click to expand...

Nope.

JodelDiplom said:

Here's my alternate theory: Having a strong national identity does not mean your country can't be deeply divided. Especially not when it's in the middle east, and two superpowers spend 15+ years arming everyone with hypermodern weapons and destroying every institution your country ever had.

Click to expand...

1. Afghanistan is not in the middle east, it's not even in central asia to be true and it definitely isn't part of the indian subcontinent. Afghanistan is the roundabout for all of these places drawing upon them all and getting flak from them all.
2. There's been 4 superpowers involved (as well as some neighbours.), one of them twice. While they have been arming certain factions, inciting others they're also responsible for creating the institutions destroyed in the first place. The whole process has in it's current form been going on since Britain decided to expand and include a pashtuni principality on the now Pakistani side of the border and as far as the arming goes, Kiplings poem about the 10 rupee Jezzail stands today as it did back then.

Back to point, What did I actually say? When the States ability falters and falls apart as it has done in the past, the populace willingness to identify themselves as part of that crashed entity will be slim to nil, this is what happened in the post Soviet invasion climate where the state allegiance was blown away in favour of other entities, identity in that climate is not afghan but afghan suffix or just the suffix.